My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2015-10-15_REVISION - C1981018
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981018
>
2015-10-15_REVISION - C1981018
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:11:43 PM
Creation date
10/16/2015 1:22:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981018
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
10/15/2015
Doc Name
Follow up on 1st Adequacy Letter (Memo)
From
Rob Zuber
To
Clayton Wein & Jim Stark
Type & Sequence
MR166
Email Name
RDZ
CCW
JRS
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM <br />TO: CLAYTON WEIN AND JIM STARK <br />FROM: ROB ZUBER I, ..' <br />SUBJECT: DESERADO XIR-166, FOLLOW-UP ON FIRST ADEQUACY LETTER <br />DATE: 10/15/2015 <br />Gents — <br />You asked me to compare flow out of the ponds that makeup the proposed system to flow out of the pond in the existing <br />system. In my previous memo, I said that I cannot make that comparison because there is nothing in the PAP for the <br />existing system. While I was correct that there is no SEDCAD analysis, nor is there a significant record of flows from <br />the surface water monitoring data, I have had another thought about this, and I think that I can answer your question. <br />Clayton pointed me to page N-37, which states that the current design flow for this de -watering system is 307 gpm, <br />which is discharge from SDH -3, not counting any runoff from storms. With MR -166, they are saying that the discharge <br />from SDH -3 will be 350 gpm. So, that is the simple answer to your question: when the system reaches a steady state <br />(flow in equals flow out), the discharge will increase from 307 gpm to 350 gpm (an increase of 14%). Given the fact that <br />the new system will have more capacity to hold runoff from storms (three ponds rather than one), this percent increase <br />will be less when you combine the flow from the workings and runoff from a storm. Let me know if you want me to try <br />to quantify this (there may not be enough information regarding the current pond to do this). <br />Regarding our adequacy comments, Blue Mountain has sufficiently answered #4 and #5 <br />I am available to discuss this at your leisure. <br />Rob <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.